White House blasts absent Thomas in today’s briefing; Update: Thomas announces retirement; Update: WH briefing video added
posted at 12:15 pm on June 7, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
Guess who didn’t show up for work today? ABC’s Sunlen Miller reports that the seat normally occupied by Hearst Newspapers columnist Helen Thomas was mysteriously empty in today’s press briefing. Thomas understood that the White House would have to respond today to her comments about sending Jews packing for Germany and Poland (and the US!) from a land where they have lived for five millenia, and Robert Gibbs provided the expected disapproval:
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs today called Helen Thomas’ remarks, “offensive and reprehensible.”
“I think she should and has apologized,” Gibbs said at the daily briefing today, “Obviously those remarks are — do not reflect certainly the opinion of most people in here, and certainly not of the administration.” …
Helen Thomas’ front row briefing room seat was empty today, as she did not show up for the daily briefing.
Gibbs also told reporters that he hasn’t briefed Barack Obama on Thomas’ remarks as yet. Does anyone buy that? If Obama dropped by for an impromptu session with the White House press corps, wouldn’t Gibbs have warned Obama not to call on Thomas?
Meanwhile, Yid with Lid says that firing Thomas won’t really solve anything:
Strangely, though I think that Ms Thomas’ comments were horrible and very anti-Semitic I do not necessarily agree that Ms. Thomas should be fired for her anti-Semitic rantings. Helen Thomas is merely a symptom of the problem, not the disease. Firing her would be like treating HIV with a band aid.
The mainstream media which is politically correct about every other ethnic group, feature anti-Semites all of the time without barely a peep about their hatred. I wonder if there would be the same calls for Thomas’ head if she hadn’t already been considered something of a joke by the press corps, someone who has stayed on long past their time.
Just examine the facts; Pat Buchanan who is a holocaust revisionist has a daily gig on MSNBC. Some of Buchanan’s anti-Semitic greatest hits include being, labeled a Jew hater by William F Buckley, blaming the Iraq war on Jews in theAmerican Government, saying the Mossad was behind 9/11 and claiming there were too many Jews on the Supreme Court.
Neither does James Joyner, who marvels at the shock, shock of discovering Thomas is “a crazy old bat”:
Now, I’m no fan of Helen Thomas. I thought she was an over-the-hill embarrassment during the Bush Administration. The George H. W. Bush Administration. She’s a lousy columnist and holds some rather bizarre views on a wide variety of subjects. And, despite her being a pioneer who has refused to go away, I don’t think she should have a place reserved for her in White House press conferences, much less in the front row.
All that said, I’m with John Cole and Stacy McCain — a rather rare alignment of the poles! — in thinking it rather unsporting to continue piling on a crazy old woman for saying outrageous things. The sky is blue. Water is wet. Helen Thomas is a nut.
Beyond that, I’m befuddled that so many bloggers are so enthusiastic about getting someone fired over airing controversial views. That’s the nature of our enterprise, isn’t it?
He makes a good point in that regard, but the rather extreme nature of cheering ethnic cleansing makes it a little difficult to get past her comments. The argument for kicking her out of the briefing room, as I’ve seen it, is that Thomas is only there in an honorary capacity, having ceased being a news reporter decades ago. No other opinion columnist gets that kind of perch in the briefing room, and her continued presence in an honorary position would tend to honor also her extreme views. The solution to that would be to move Thomas to the back of the room, where other opiners normally go.
The other argument pertains to her employment at Hearst. This is more of a tu quoque argument, in that the people defending Thomas would demand her termination if she had demanded that the federal government round up all illegal aliens, put them in camps, and deport them. And that’s probably true, as we have seen in the reaction to Erick Erickson‘s hiring at CNN, for a much milder example of controversial statements, but if that was wrong, then so would be a demand for Hearst to fire Thomas for her outburst, which wasn’t really all that surprising, given her history of observations on the subject. However, that doesn’t let Hearst off the hook for their relationship; if she’s an anti-Semitic bigot, then it’s fair game to point out that Hearst is giving her a platform and that those offended by it might want to take their business elsewhere.
This controversy won’t go away soon; supposedly, the same person has more video of Thomas expounding on her observations of Jews and Israelis. We’ll see whether that pushes Thomas into retirement, whether she gets there first, or at all.
Update: Hearst just announced that Thomas will retire:
Helen Thomas announced Monday that she is retiring, effective immediately.
Her decision came after her controversial comments about Israel and the Palestinians were captured on videotape and widely disseminated on the Internet.
Thomas later issued a statement: “I deeply regret my comments I made last week regarding the Israelis and the Palestinians. They do not reflect my heart-felt belief that peace will come to the Middle East only when all parties recognize the need for mutual respect and tolerance. May that day come soon.’’
Thomas will mark her 90th birthday on Aug. 4.
The Hearst website is temporarily down, thanks to the traffic hitting the site.
Update II: Just one step ahead of the comeuppance, apparently:
“Helen Thomas’ comments were indefensible and the White House Correspondents Association board firmly dissociates itself from them. Many in our profession who have known Helen for years were saddened by the comments, which were especially unfortunate in light of her role as a trail blazer on the White House beat. . .
“[T]he incident does revive the issue of whether it is appropriate for an opinion columnist to have a front row seat in the WH briefing room. That is an issue under the jurisdiction of this board. We are actively seeking input from our association members on this important matter, and we have scheduled a special meeting of the WHCA board on Thursday to decide on the seating issue.”
Now they’re off the hook, but it does appear that the WHCA was prepared to take action. Good for them, and they framed it properly, too.
Update III: It was Mediaite’s Tommy Christopher who asked the question of Gibbs this morning, which is interesting in that Tommy has defended Thomas on occasion:
Mediaite’s own Tommy Christopher asked if President Obama had “any reaction to the controversy over Helen’s remarks?” Gibbs was clearly ready for the question and made clear that her comments did not reflect the opinion of the White House.
Helen Thomas has enjoyed legendary status in the Press Room, in part due to her deserved status as feminist pioneer as well as her notoriety for holding administration’s feet to the fire over issues and policies with which she disagrees. And while her friends in the press briefing room are likely torn over seeing thier friend endure this controversy (of her own making by the way) there is growing sentiment that she might lose her job over her comments.
Tommy didn’t write the post; Colby Hall wrote it, both of whom are friends of mine. Tommy will have more thoughts on this story later today, focusing on the reaction in the White House press corps to the controversy. Should be interesting.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
…or maybe she meant to say The Camps instead of Germany and Poland, and THAT is why you’re defending her.
Laura in Maryland on June 7, 2010 at 3:18 PM
Perhaps Anita Dunn perceived some competition there for Evil Tongue Queen.
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 3:20 PM
I saved two comments from two other Americans that address these rhetorical questions by the Hapless Left…
Here those two comments are:
(1.) “The problem with Helen Thomas goes beyond her remarks. She made them while leaving Jewish Heritage Day at the White House – to a rabbi of all people – and she spoke clearly, right into his camera.
“Obviously, she was quite angry about having to attend an event honoring Jewish heritage.”
(2.) “Please note: Ms. Thomas asked Jews to return only to two countries, Poland and Germany.
“(These) are the only two countries that during WW2 had concentration camps. (Of all the) 700,000 Jews from Arab countries that (have) come to Israel, she only wants them in Poland and Germany: she really wants the Final Solution.
“How come Obama and WH journalists are quiet? Because most of them agree with her. This is what Progressive today believe.”
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 3:23 PM
She should have retired years ago.
Terrye on June 7, 2010 at 3:24 PM
She has admitted that she went over the line, publicly stating her long held beliefs…
d1carter on June 7, 2010 at 3:32 PM
I am not saying what I would do is legal…it’s what I would do.
It’s not “occupied” territory, it was won in a war…a war started by the loser.
The U.N. is not the final arbitrator in this…here is a lesson, don’t attack a country and when you lose don’t cry about losing a sliver of land…Egypt, by the good graciousness of Israel, was allowed to keep most of what they lost.
They attacked, with the intent to occupy and destroy, they lost, and Israel gained. Israel was not the attacker…to the victor goes the spoils in this case.
That is Israel’s land…as a lesson to others, leave Israel alone, and they will leave you alone.
Get it, you little weaselly Jew hater…
right2bright on June 7, 2010 at 3:35 PM
So, good came of this.
hawkdriver on June 7, 2010 at 3:35 PM
She knew exactly what she was saying, concentration camps, and you know…but you don’t want to publicly be known as a anti-Semite, so you and Helen have a lot in common; common policies, and you don’t want them public. How do you look yourself in the mirror if you are ashamed of your beliefs?
right2bright on June 7, 2010 at 3:37 PM
whaaat ? next thing you know you will be quoting Seymour Hirsh. The formula is “land for peace”. If arabs are unable to provide “peace” there will not be “land”. Simple and logical, even for a antisemite like you to understand , no ?
runner on June 7, 2010 at 3:39 PM
The possible disagreement I have with that is it is based on the idea that Helen Thomas has an even vague understanding of history. Based on everything else she’s ever said, I’m not so sure. I do believe, however, that a substantial number of Progressives are rabid anti-Semites, and that many of them would openly support pogroms if they thought they could get away with it.
DrMagnolias on June 7, 2010 at 3:46 PM
ProfessorMiao and others here, you are correct and Jimbo3 is literally manufacturing restatements of Thomas’ crud to try to accommodate her statements.
Thomas said, “they (Israel) should get out…these people (lands?) are occupied, after all…”
Questioned at that, “…where should they (Israel) go?”
Thomas replied, “To Poland, or Germany…”
She DIDN’T SAY “go back to Israel” or any portion of the Middle East, she said “to Poland or Germany…”
Poland and Germany, the two areas on the globe where “Israel” was held in concentration camps and murdered.
She didn’t say that “Israel” (“they”) “should go” to anywhere else, except adding “or the United States…” which, I believe, represents Thomas’ opine on behalf of the now-brazen Left/Islam/Democrat concentration of their assumption that their end goal is the “eradicating Israel”.
It’s the “overconfidence” speech of the invading horde, in other words, Thomas assuming that the U.S. should be home to “Israel” after they’re “decamped” from their own nation, only to be situated here (U.S.) where they’ll suffer an equal fate to “Poland and Germany…”
…which will never happen in the U.S. because it’s not what this nation is about or ever will be about BUT it represents the subtextural goal of the Left in their assumption that they represent if not now lead the U.S.
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 3:51 PM
FIFY…
Mary in LA on June 7, 2010 at 3:54 PM
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 3:23 PM
Well, take a look around the internet today. It is populated with a number of sites (and growing with them) that INSTRUCT HISTORY rather than inform on it.
Wikipedia is a prime example of such on many issues and individuals, edited and written by an INSTRUCTING LEFTWING who is literally REWRITING HISTORY rather than reporting on it.
And that typifies the Left, it’s what Communism, Socialism, Islam, the whole range of “cleansers” do, they instruct or “re-educate” populations such that the facts are represented to suit the socio-political “rule” rather than be reported on, and what IS “reported” falls into that “rewritten” “cleanser” routine: what works to suit the socio-political goals, not what actually happened or was.
All of us at some point are guilty of allowing this to happen — even Conservative, afraid to expose information for fear of political backlash and the inevitable Leftwing “reinterpretation” of reported facts to condemn whomever reports what — but it is a dedicated goal of Leftwing and of Islam to do this, particularly, to “re-educate” or instruct about a carefully reinterpreted (but phony) history rather than admit facts.
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 3:57 PM
She’s an “instructed” and “redoctored” mind, someone who has learned what she thinks from some of that “careful redoctrination” stuff. She has been one of Obama’s chief supporters as to his policies, by the way…
Red diaper baby? Maybe her parents weren’t Communists (which Obama’s apparently WERE as also his grandparents and general social climate) but she suffers the same “misinformed mind” that has led her to conclude as she has. It’s hardly an isolated misinformed mind among many in the Left like Thomas.
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 4:00 PM
I defended her becuase I think she meant to say “Israel (not Jews) needs to get the hell out of the Occupied Territories”. How is that anti-Semitic or wishing the death or the removal of all Jews?
Jimbo3 on June 7, 2010 at 12:57 PM
…or maybe she meant to say The Camps instead of Germany and Poland, and THAT is why you’re defending her.
Laura in Maryland on June 7, 2010 at 3:18 PM
What’s wrong with camping? Sounds like fun.
JerseyJeff on June 7, 2010 at 4:05 PM
In another angry outburst Zero yelled:
“We’re on the same page Helen, but we can’t be that obvious about it!!!”
/s
viking01 on June 7, 2010 at 4:05 PM
So that’s why the LA Times suppressed the tape ack during the campaign?
clnurnberg on June 7, 2010 at 4:07 PM
…Hitler
Saddam Hussein
Goebbels
Himmler
Idy Amin
…Walter Kronkite (“I’m proud to sit at the left hand of satan!”).
…list continues…
Old does not necessarily, inherently mean good. It just means old. Good and bad are qualities of old and young alike, not assigned to one or the other by means of age.
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 4:08 PM
…Hitler
Saddam Hussein
Goebbels
Himmler
Idy Amin
…Walter Cronkite (“I’m proud to sit at the left hand of satan!”)
…Fidel Castro
Chairman Mao…
…list continues…
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 4:09 PM
Of course the courageous Obama Admin had nothing to say until she was safely out of the press room.
/spit
Edouard on June 7, 2010 at 4:11 PM
Not with lice, no bathing or decent toilette facilities, no food (or starvation quantities of grain tidbits now and then), medical experiments on your body and being stuffed in ovens or gassed. THEN camping is most certainly NOT “fun”.
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 4:12 PM
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/General+News/61195/Hamas-Praises-Helen-Thomas-Statement.html
Hamas likes their spokes monster.
the_nile on June 7, 2010 at 4:14 PM
I enjoy Yid’s work but in this case, he typifies that rather “mind numbed” glibness or willing acceptance of the awful that continues to mystify many as to why and how Jews voted for the Socialism that led to their demise in Germany — I have firsthand heard some elderly Jews who knew survivors from the Holocaust actually admit that they never believed the Nazis were actually going to harm them, that they got in the boxcars believing they were going somewhere to actually work and contribute to Germany.
I just mean that the scales remain on the eyes of some — both Jewish and Gentile — about the end result of certain very bad things: they conclude in even worse very bad things.
Evil does exist in this world and it’s misleading to a point of mortal failure to assume one can simply coexist with it or that it’s “not really going to hurt you”. It’s evil, that’s what it does.
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 4:19 PM
Yes, of course it does. It’s evil, that’s what it does.
I mean that (italicized portion) in the conceptual (but actual) sense. That which is corrupted relishes the corrupted.
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 4:21 PM
Yeah, in Belorus & the Ukraine they skipped the camps, and shot them into mass graves.
ProfessorMiao on June 7, 2010 at 4:23 PM
She shouldn’t have said what she said, but she has her 1st Amendment rights if she wants to push them? Are we as thin skinned as Canada now and punish folks for saying stuff even if we don’t agree with it? She’s bigoted on this issue, yes, but that’s her right, or should be, in a free country. Others have said a lot worse and are still ticking along. That said, she was probably too old to be still doing what she was doing and might be unable to shift positions even when faced with valid evidence–BUT she has/had a right to all of it whether we or I like it or not.
jeanie on June 7, 2010 at 4:32 PM
…to pursue her avocation: baking Hansel and Gretel into cookies!
landlines on June 7, 2010 at 4:36 PM
Thank you! :)
Blake on June 7, 2010 at 4:38 PM
When did we give up our first amendment rights? Do only reporters or the people who we disagree with have them? Are we barred from responding to their comments? No. Get a clue!
Blake on June 7, 2010 at 4:40 PM
*doing a little victory dance*
MeatHeadinCA on June 7, 2010 at 4:42 PM
I defended her becuase I think she meant to say “Israel (not Jews) needs to get the hell out of the Occupied Territories”. How is that anti-Semitic or wishing the death or the removal of all Jews?
Jimbo3 on June 7, 2010 at 12:57 PM
–Have you ever been to one of the camps?
Jimbo3 on June 7, 2010 at 4:43 PM
1) Helen must believe that what is now called Israel is occupied.
2) She’s being racists by asserting that only “Palestinians” have a right to that land.
MeatHeadinCA on June 7, 2010 at 4:48 PM
Whoa! Hold on there. You underestimate the power of denial. There you are with your baby and 3 kids under 6. What’s your options? Knowing that they are going to kill you and your kids so choosing to cooperate and hope for the best? If you stayed and hid, most likely they would find and kill you. There was no food and they often promised a loaf of bread. Most of the people you knew and loved have already died from starvation, shootings, disease. Don’t over-estimate the will to live.
And people did not have a clue as to the extent and the efficiency of the genocidal machine. As one guy said after being liberated from Birkenau. We knew it was a death camp. But what we didn’t know, what we couldn’t even imagine, is that most of us would be murdered within an hour or two upon arrival.
Blake on June 7, 2010 at 4:48 PM
The best part about this is that she will forever be more remembered for the anti Semitic comments that forced into retirement, rather than as the Grand Dame Of The White House Press Corps. She’s the Grand Racist Of The White House Press Corps for the rest of eternity. Which is a just reward for for her, I’d say.
holygoat on June 7, 2010 at 4:54 PM
I can’t believe you are rewriting what she did say. You are so lame. What she said was anti semitic. Your defense of her is motivated by antisemitism.
Blake on June 7, 2010 at 4:57 PM
She does have her 1st Amendment rights and upon re-reading my post several times I do not think that I’ve implied that any one here is without them either…including myself.
jeanie on June 7, 2010 at 5:01 PM
Who get’s her seat…?
The smell alone should be pure ambrosia!
Seven Percent Solution on June 7, 2010 at 5:03 PM
Hey, she has – and exercised – her 1st Amendment rights. Has anyone suggested she be imprisoned for what she said? Fined?
No.
Do not confuse ‘consequences’ of speech – which are fine and just – with an abridging of 1st Amendment ‘free speech’ rights.
Unlike Canada, where the government will attempt to punish a private citizen for what they said, this is nothing like that. One should not expect to say whatever they want, no matter how aggregious, with complete immunity from consequences that may result from friends, family, colleagues, employers, etc – and these would not constitute violations of their ‘free speech’.
Midas on June 7, 2010 at 5:04 PM
Egregious.
Wow, I was typing too fast, where the heck did ‘aggregious’ come from? lol
Midas on June 7, 2010 at 5:06 PM
Has anyone said she should be prosecuted for what she said? If so, then that’s wrong and un-Constitutional. Should she be fired? Absolutely.
MeatHeadinCA on June 7, 2010 at 5:07 PM
Can we expect Helen to be on the next Flotilla?
MeatHeadinCA on June 7, 2010 at 5:08 PM
Then why on earth did you even bring it up??? You’re moaning about her rights as if they were infringed upon by the exercising of our rights which you refer to a punishment.
Blake on June 7, 2010 at 5:18 PM
No, not on the sole basis of saying what she thinks, whether anyone else deems it right or wrong. For incompetence? Yes…and, her statements could be interpreted as such. Solely for an accusation of anti-Semitism–no. While her’s is a bigoted stance, it’s no worse or better than many others have said and still have their jobs as Ed points out in his article. In any case, she probably decided of her own accord to quit and has done so…a good choice.
jeanie on June 7, 2010 at 5:19 PM
Just exercising my rights?!!! lol! That’s your interpretation and my trying to refute it is non-productive. Think what you like.
jeanie on June 7, 2010 at 5:22 PM
Find me the quote where someone suggests that Thomas should be denied her 1st Amendment rights to free speech. She has a right to say whatever she wants without fear of retribution from the government, but she’s open to all the the other consequences that come with saying stupid shit. And that includes getting fired from her job, which didn’t even happen in this case. Go back and reread the Constitution as many times as it takes for you to comprehend what you are reading.
holygoat on June 7, 2010 at 5:23 PM
Yeah, and unlike you, I was horrified.
Laura in Maryland on June 7, 2010 at 5:24 PM
Corollary: Being politically correct about the ethnic group known as whites means sliming them.
aengus on June 7, 2010 at 5:26 PM
1) The statement she made was racists. If I’m an employer, I want to reserve the right to fire a racist working under me.
2) Those saying vile things such as this should have no access to the President. If she isn’t fire (too late, she retired), then at the very least she should never be given access to the the WH press secretary or anyone higher.
3) While I am concerned about what others have said, their actions in no way make her actions more acceptable.
Finally, don’t even try to say she should be allowed to keep her job because of the 1st Amendment. That’s just sick.
MeatHeadinCA on June 7, 2010 at 5:31 PM
Helen Thomas finally exposed what was really behind her eyes, and hidden all along in her black, evil, and ugly soul. She was pampered way to long, whereas she stepped over the line with her anti-Semitic rant and was forced to retire in disgrace. GOOD RIDDANCE TO BAD RUBBISH…
byteshredder on June 7, 2010 at 5:32 PM
Late Breaking News: Helen Thomas replaced by 50 year old mattress – no one notices the difference.
jake-the-goose on June 7, 2010 at 5:35 PM
chrissy just mentioned it in passing like it was just a little minor issue…no bloviating whatsoever…
cmsinaz on June 7, 2010 at 5:37 PM
probably something akin to a mattress in a 2 dollar flophouse…..yep, reall nice…./
ted c on June 7, 2010 at 5:38 PM
This is the old 1000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean joke.
We need people everywhere with cameras, recording devices, etc. to catch these vile lefties and out them with their hatred and corruption. Let America see all of the Helens, and the ACORNS, and the Census corruption, etc. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
JeffB. on June 7, 2010 at 5:43 PM
Only this “retirement” of Thomas can top my other favorite Thomas Moment, when Tony Snow thanked her for the “Hezbollah point of view” at a WH Press assembly. God Bless Tony Snow, he was and always will be my favorite WH Press Secretary.
Conservalicious on June 7, 2010 at 5:44 PM
One down – millions to go.
RedNewEnglander on June 7, 2010 at 5:47 PM
Little else to say but the other posters have pretty much spanked your lying anti-semitic faux attorney arse. Idiot-watch her video. You’re a joke. No doubt even if you are a two bit attorney you don’t take depositions. That is obvious.
CWforFreedom on June 7, 2010 at 5:53 PM
you don’t write a book with a person and sit side by side and not hear this id
eologiocy spouted long ago.fixed
cableguy615 on June 7, 2010 at 5:55 PM
The first amendment obviously protects us against the government infringing on our speech. It doesn’t keep employers from doing so. Can you imagine if it did? Even Walter Williams today went down that path a bit…I was surprised.
CWforFreedom on June 7, 2010 at 5:56 PM
Maybe if I live as old as Thomas…
You think you will live to be 200 ??? You must be pretty damn healthy!
DrAllecon on June 7, 2010 at 12:22 PM
cableguy615 on June 7, 2010 at 5:58 PM
Yes I can. It would be something like the Fairness doctrine. Lefties that held views and espoused them the way Helen Thomas did would never be fired. Conservatives that believed in property rights would be painted racists and would either never be promoted or eventually terminated.
Just because my speech is protected (from gov’t prosecution) does not mean I should be protected from the actions of my words…
MeatHeadinCA on June 7, 2010 at 5:59 PM
She’s a pioneer? What did she do? Refuse to give up the front center seat to a man? Should I call her Rosa Thomas? Helen Parks?
SouthernGent on June 7, 2010 at 6:08 PM
If you are not anti-Semitic then you are a complete idiot. She said for the Jews to get the hell of out their homes, which they paid good money for to buy from the Arabs. Since then they have take additional defensive positions in response to unprovoked attacks, and have already given back most of that land. There is no reason whatsoever for them to return to a country where they were persecuted for centuries prior to the Holocaust.
pedestrian on June 7, 2010 at 6:08 PM
MrJIMBO avoids saying the she said they should go back to Poland and Germany. Hmmm I wonder why.
CWforFreedom on June 7, 2010 at 6:08 PM
La Diabla?
MeatHeadinCA on June 7, 2010 at 6:11 PM
Jimbonehead…..she could have said just go to Israel but that is not what she said -now is it?
CWforFreedom on June 7, 2010 at 6:12 PM
At her age, in her youth it was, shamefully, socially acceptable to say those things. It know longer is. She is either senile or an embarrassment to Hearst to be an employee. For Hearst to not be able to fire her would be an infringement on their first amendment rights.
pedestrian on June 7, 2010 at 6:13 PM
madmonkphotog on June 7, 2010 at 12:23 PM
Caught my attention, too. We know it, but I don’t like Gibbsy blythely admitting it! If he knows, name names and rout them out!
-Aslan’s Girl
Aslans Girl on June 7, 2010 at 6:15 PM
This isn’t about first amendment rights. Nobody is obligated to provide a platform to any bigot who demands one. Hearst is not obliged to employ someone whose views obviously skew their journalism, and the White House Press Corps is not obligated to honor someone who sits on what (I still hope) is the lunatic fringe when it comes to Israel.
ProfessorMiao on June 7, 2010 at 6:21 PM
Bullcrap. In her youth the Nazis were slaughtering every Jew in Europe they could get their hands on. Israel didn’t exist until she was nearly 30 years old.
By the same logic, in her youth it was marginally acceptable to call blacks the N-word, and segregation was the rule across the south. I don’t see her oozing antipathy toward blacks, though.
ProfessorMiao on June 7, 2010 at 6:23 PM
She didn’t misspeak; she has always felt this way. She simply made it clear just how id
eologioticalshe is.Goodbye Helen.
Enjoy your retirement.You jew-hating piece of sh1t!badtemper on June 7, 2010 at 12:47 PM
fixed 2 and 3
cableguy615 on June 7, 2010 at 6:33 PM
I don’t get your point. I was referring to events such as this, in 1947.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Immigration/exodus.html
pedestrian on June 7, 2010 at 6:40 PM
Justice.
MikeknaJ on June 7, 2010 at 6:44 PM
Is jeanie AnninCa? just as obnoxious…
I’m glad to read that so many here at HA are offended and outraged by Thomas’ statements. This is the one blog I try to visit everyday and I can say I read most every post… Lourdes you make great points…
CCRWM on June 7, 2010 at 6:50 PM
Funny that Gibbs had to go out of the way to clarify that the administration doesn’t share her views. Gee Gibbsy, why would anyone have gotten that impression?
Knuckledragger on June 7, 2010 at 6:58 PM
Helen and other incontinent men/women in Washington, DC, don’t know how to retire with grace.
This is what they deserve.
Schadenfreude on June 7, 2010 at 7:06 PM
I guess I don’t get yours either. The exodus of surviving Jews made a greater impression on her than the slaughter of so many more, I guess you’re saying?
ProfessorMiao on June 7, 2010 at 7:12 PM
She should have retired 50 years ago!
flytier on June 7, 2010 at 7:24 PM
Regrettable, some people seem to have no impression at all from the Holocaust. Some even deny it even happened.
pedestrian on June 7, 2010 at 7:27 PM
For those who need help reading between lines.
MJBrutus on June 7, 2010 at 7:33 PM
Maybe not “most” but certainly enought to be worriesome about how the middle east peace process gets covered.
Anyone, anyone at all, who holds that view should be outed.
If there are others who wish death to Israel they should not be trusted with reporting the news.
petunia on June 7, 2010 at 7:44 PM
It is not the government who is asking for her removal.
The government can’t infringe on your rights. But people can exercise their 1st amendment rights and demand her removal.
That is what has happened. Helen’s rights were not violated in anyway. She is still free to say every horrid thing she wants to say. She won’t go to jail or be fined.
petunia on June 7, 2010 at 7:49 PM
Rashid Khalidi, Bill Ayers, Rev Wright, Jodie Evans..all Obama buddies.
clnurnberg on June 7, 2010 at 7:57 PM
God the left loves palistinians
funny thing is that if the Jews did leave, which they won’t, the palis wouldn’t get a sniff
they’d be run out of town quickly to the next squallor
I hate being told how it’s going to be by a group that would be hardpressed to manufacture a book of matches
you know, the palis weren’t always stupid but they put their lot, whether willfully or not, in with tyrants
to bad they don’t have the stones of our ancestors who resisted tyranny as opposed to embracing it
I said it
we are better
Sonosam on June 7, 2010 at 8:05 PM
Of course, now Thomas can blame the Jews for ending her career.
profitsbeard on June 7, 2010 at 8:05 PM
Oh yeah
That’s why the left loves palis
they see dependance
ef em all
Sonosam on June 7, 2010 at 8:07 PM
Helen Thomas thinks Israel should not exist……
Sarah Palin wears an Israeli Flag pin…..
idesign on June 7, 2010 at 9:03 PM
She isn’t being prosecuted by the federal government, is she?
Free speech guarantees any citizen freedom from retaliation if we criticize our government. That’s all it is.
In Thomas’ case, she spoke her opinion, others spoke theirs, and she’s come up very, very short, so to speak.
“Freedom of speech” doesn’t guarantee or provide ANYone lack of responsibility for what one says. Some things said bear consequences.
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 9:10 PM
I know what I wrote and you’ve misapplied it to try to water it down, and what I wrote was about a denial process that some (Jews and Gentiles alike, but as to Jews, it persists, especially here in the U.S. witnessed by their high majority vote in support of Obama, AND their determination to vote for the Democrats no-matter-what, disregarding the obvious and much information that many of the rest of us continue to relate) (so not as if they aren’t aware or haven’t heard, etc.).
I can understand being “forced” into boxcars by deprivation and utter devastation of resources — no choice, try to survive even if another hour or day — BUT that’s NOT what I wrote about.
There is Yid with a Lid, a Jewish guy I admire and read from often, but there he is, dismissing mostly what Helen Thomas said because it’s said by others or similar argument (since it’s happening from others, what she said, her beliefs, then why try to punish Thomas, dismiss her…).
It’s that “moral relativism” thing that picks up it’s awful head on issues that are mostly too detestable for most to even tolerate, nor should we. But some “reason it away” by claiming “everything is equal,” or “everything’s good” or “all is all” or some sort of similar hippie/New Wave mush.
Everything is NOT equal. Everything is NOT morally similar. There really IS evil in our world and the sooner some start to recognize it the better for them, the better for the age-old argument of just what is good and what isn’t.
Liberals engage in this sort of “moral equivalency” quite a bit and in this case, with Thomas and how Yid has presented his “defense” of her (because that’s what he accomplishes, an attempt to defend her AND her statements), Yid is sounding all too typically Liberal: “moral equivalency” reigns…one thing is bad, but aren’t many things bad, so why eradicate or separate from the bad.
My point earlier is it’s mortally and morally wrong to try to embrace or even tolerate evil. It’s evil, it’s nature is to not do good, but to harm. Paying it’s rent or buying it a nice outfit won’t change it’s nature.
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 9:19 PM
And I disagree…completely…with that ^^.
The “people” who DID “have a clue” about genocide didn’t speak about it for fear for themselves (moral evil at work).
Some things (human lives at stake, human lives being risked, butchered, ruined, assaulted, hideously attacked) bear a higher calling than self-interest. In the case of those who knew and said nothing, they were morally culpable for the evil at work, whether weak or strong, families or no families, the refusal to try to render aid and seek help is morally responsible for the evil at work there.
Don’t remain blind to this, please. Don’t continue to subscribe to the “but we didn’t know” or “we were only following orders” excuses. It bears the same moral responsibility as he/she/it who wages the death blows.
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 9:24 PM
Thanks, nice thing for you to write.
:)
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 9:32 PM
No.
It is, however, a good point to to start research from, using legitimate sources.
mnealtx on June 7, 2010 at 9:39 PM
She should have retired 20 years ago. Maybe she would have spent her elder’ years, less crabby.
tx2654 on June 7, 2010 at 10:02 PM
I don’t mean to sound harsh, I fear I may have, two comments up ^^, but you have misunderstood my point.
NOW people such as that know, there should be an end to the “we just didn’t imagine” line of useless thought. MY point is that evil does exist, and denying it does is both foolish to a point of mortality (which you’ve also illustrated in your story there) AND morally irresponsible in the sense that the evidence is ignored, minimized or attempted to be “morally equivocated” with the rest (or to be more specific, to be morally equivocated with Good).
Lourdes on June 7, 2010 at 10:03 PM
Believe me when I say that this is a toned version of what I really want to say…
I’m glad she has been exposed, finally, for what she is…!@#$%^&^%$#
jerrytbg on June 7, 2010 at 10:46 PM
Did you know there are over 30 entries in Encarta that start with French?
jerrytbg on June 7, 2010 at 11:07 PM
Does this change the ending of the movie Hollywood is making about Thomas’ life? You know, the one in which they cast Annette Benning instead of John Lovitz or Rachel Dratsch.
Wingo on June 8, 2010 at 12:30 AM
It’s good to see that at least the Obama administration is enough of a friend of Israel to condemn unequivocally these horrible words from Helen Thomas. The implications for our world would be grave indeed if it didn’t.
flutejpl on June 8, 2010 at 9:19 AM
Time to reassign that front row seat… The bigot Helen Thomas will never need it again… Oh, scratch that 90th birthday celebration in the WH; she’s officially radioactive…
Khun Joe on June 8, 2010 at 3:20 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »